Michelle Malkin posted an editorial on her website today from the Christian Science Monitor that completely debunks the media's portrayal of the Jena 6 incident. And the myths that have pervaded the media are extreme and revealing. You can read the whole article here.
"The media got most of the basics wrong. In fact, I have never before witnessed such a disgrace in professional journalism. I should know. I live in Jena. My wife has taught at Jena High School for many years. And most important, I am probably the only reporter who has covered these events from the very beginning.The real story of Jena and the Jena 6 is quite different from what the national media presented. It’s time to set the record straight.
"Myth 1: The Whites-Only Tree. There has never been a “whites-only” tree at Jena High School.
"Myth 2: Nooses a Signal to Black Students. An investigation by school officials, police, and an FBI agent revealed the true motivation behind the placing of two nooses in the tree the day after the assembly. According to the expulsion committee, the crudely constructed nooses were not aimed at black students.
"Myth 3: Nooses Were a Hate Crime. Although many believe the three white students should have been prosecuted for a hate crime for hanging the nooses, the incident did not meet the legal criteria for a federal hate crime.
"Myth 7: The Schoolyard Fight. The event on Dec. 4, 2006 was consistently labeled a “schoolyard fight.” But witnesses described something much more horrific. Several black students, including those now known as the Jena 6, barricaded an exit to the school’s gym as they lay in wait for Justin Barker to exit. (It remains unclear why Mr. Barker was specifically targeted.)
"Myth 8: The Attack Is Linked to the Nooses. Nowhere in any of the evidence, including statements by witnesses and defendants, is there any reference to the noose incident that occurred three months prior. This was confirmed by the United States attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, Donald Washington, on numerous occasions."
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Monday, August 20, 2007
North American Union Moving Forward
This week, President Bush will be meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon at the Fairmont Le Chateau Montebello resort in Canada. The topic of discussion will be the Security and Prosperity Partnership. While the White House continues to dismiss the North American Union as a "silly conspiracy," documents obtained in FOIA requests suggest otherwise.
The Washington Times picked up this story on the front page today. I found one paragraph of this story specifically interesting.
"The White House dismissed suspicions of a coming North American Union as a 'silly' conspiracy theory. 'Americans are going to remain Americans, Canadians are going to remain Canadians and Mexicans are going to remain Mexicans,' a senior Bush administration official said on the condition of anonymity."
The irony? Even when the White House is trying to dismiss claims of the North American Union it has to use anonymous officials. Why didn't it come right out and say, this is not a plan to cede away American sovereignty? Because that would be denying the truth.
Worldnetdaily.com reported that 21 members of Congress sent a letter to President Bush urging him to open up the backroom deals being made about the SPP.
"The last paragraph of the letter called upon the president 'not to pledge or agree to any further movement in connection with the SPP at the upcoming North American summit.'
The Washington Times picked up this story on the front page today. I found one paragraph of this story specifically interesting.
"The White House dismissed suspicions of a coming North American Union as a 'silly' conspiracy theory. 'Americans are going to remain Americans, Canadians are going to remain Canadians and Mexicans are going to remain Mexicans,' a senior Bush administration official said on the condition of anonymity."
The irony? Even when the White House is trying to dismiss claims of the North American Union it has to use anonymous officials. Why didn't it come right out and say, this is not a plan to cede away American sovereignty? Because that would be denying the truth.
Worldnetdaily.com reported that 21 members of Congress sent a letter to President Bush urging him to open up the backroom deals being made about the SPP.
"The last paragraph of the letter called upon the president 'not to pledge or agree to any further movement in connection with the SPP at the upcoming North American summit.'
"The letter concluded that, 'in the interest of transparency and accountability, we urge you to bring to the Congress whatever provisions have already been agreed upon and those now being pursued or contemplated as part of this initiative, for the purpose of obtaining authorization through the normal legislative process.'
"Signatories to the letter included the following members of the House of Representatives:
- Rep. Terry Everett, R-Alabama
- Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California
- Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado
- Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas
- Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Kansas
- Rep. Walter Jones, R-North Carolina
- Rep. David Davis, R-Tenn.
- Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Georgia
- Rep. John Boozman, R-Arkansas
- Rep. John Duncan, R-Tenn.
- Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Virginia
- Rep. Tom Price, R-Georgia
- Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Florida
- Rep. Sue Myrick, R-North Carolina
- Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Alabama
- Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif.
- Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa
- Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon
- Rep. Michael Rogers, R-Alabama
- Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Michigan
- Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Alabama
- Rep. Todd Akin, R-Missouri
Thursday, August 16, 2007
GOP just doesn't get it
Yesterday, at the St. Petersburg Chamber of Commerce, Republican Party chairman Mel Martinez confirmed that, sometimes, the GOP just doesn't understand. Sen. Martinez scolded Republican presidential candidates Giuliani and Romney for taking a tough stance on illegal immigration and opposing the President's immigration reform. The St. Petersburg Times reported.
"Presidential contests are about leadership. ... It's about leading on the tough issues," Martinez told the St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce. "It was easy to say, 'This wasn't good enough, this isn't right, I don't agree with Martinez.' ... But at the end of the day what is your answer? How would you solve this?"
Well the first step is to deport illegal immigrants, put the national guard back on the border, and toughen penalties against employers. And do not grant illegal aliens amnesty.
Isn't it simple logic, that if you increase some thing's desirability that more people will want it? Well how about offering citizenship in the greatest country in the world to the people of a corrupt third-world country? That's a pretty big incentive. And it will only increase the number of immigrants who seek to cross the border illegally.
Why doesn't the Republican Party get it? When tens of thousands of people called their senators to oppose the immigration bill, didn't that send a clear message? When GOP donations dropped off by almost 40 percent, didn't that send a clear message? The American people do not want amnesty, and they don't want illegal immigration. What ever happened to politicians representing the people?
Well, thankfully, most of the Republican Senators did represent America, and voted down the bill. Yet, Sen. Martinez still finds reason to criticize.
"Presidential contests are about leadership. ... It's about leading on the tough issues," Martinez told the St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce. "It was easy to say, 'This wasn't good enough, this isn't right, I don't agree with Martinez.' ... But at the end of the day what is your answer? How would you solve this?"
Well the first step is to deport illegal immigrants, put the national guard back on the border, and toughen penalties against employers. And do not grant illegal aliens amnesty.
Isn't it simple logic, that if you increase some thing's desirability that more people will want it? Well how about offering citizenship in the greatest country in the world to the people of a corrupt third-world country? That's a pretty big incentive. And it will only increase the number of immigrants who seek to cross the border illegally.
Why doesn't the Republican Party get it? When tens of thousands of people called their senators to oppose the immigration bill, didn't that send a clear message? When GOP donations dropped off by almost 40 percent, didn't that send a clear message? The American people do not want amnesty, and they don't want illegal immigration. What ever happened to politicians representing the people?
Well, thankfully, most of the Republican Senators did represent America, and voted down the bill. Yet, Sen. Martinez still finds reason to criticize.
Monday, August 06, 2007
Georgetown professor Yahya Hendi spoke at a gathering of Saudi Arabians yesterday, saying that Muslims are improving their image and position in society. The Washington Times picked up this Reuters news clip.
"Mr. Hendi said U.S. Muslims were working on 'nationalizing' Islam as part of the fabric of U.S. society, including cutting funding links to Muslim countries.
"Mr. Hendi, who met with President Bush days after September 11, said Muslims exhibited a tendency to shun political action such as voting and running for office because it was considered akin to surrendering to U.S. culture."
This position contradicts itself sorely. If Muslims want to integrate in our society, then they will have to realize that voting is a basic part of being a responsible citizen. And just for the record, that holds true for the 50 or so percent of eligible voters who do not exercise this right.
But seeing voting as a submission to U.S. culture is a fundamental flaw. Our forefathers died for the right to have a Constititutional Republic. Voting is not U.S. culture, it is basic freedom and liberty. And Muslims see this as weak and surrender, at least, according to Mr. Hendi.
Now, Mr. Hendi presents a rather tame image of Islam. However, the website Their Own Words presents a startling counterpart to this image. Ahmad Bahr, Acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council said on Sudan TV said, "America will be annihilated, while Islam will remain… Allah is greater than America, by whom many are blinded today."
"Mr. Hendi said U.S. Muslims were working on 'nationalizing' Islam as part of the fabric of U.S. society, including cutting funding links to Muslim countries.
"Mr. Hendi, who met with President Bush days after September 11, said Muslims exhibited a tendency to shun political action such as voting and running for office because it was considered akin to surrendering to U.S. culture."
This position contradicts itself sorely. If Muslims want to integrate in our society, then they will have to realize that voting is a basic part of being a responsible citizen. And just for the record, that holds true for the 50 or so percent of eligible voters who do not exercise this right.
But seeing voting as a submission to U.S. culture is a fundamental flaw. Our forefathers died for the right to have a Constititutional Republic. Voting is not U.S. culture, it is basic freedom and liberty. And Muslims see this as weak and surrender, at least, according to Mr. Hendi.
Now, Mr. Hendi presents a rather tame image of Islam. However, the website Their Own Words presents a startling counterpart to this image. Ahmad Bahr, Acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council said on Sudan TV said, "America will be annihilated, while Islam will remain… Allah is greater than America, by whom many are blinded today."
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
"We should have no conservatives in the media"
With liberals trying to resurrect the unconstitutional Fairness Doctrine, society has increased its scrutiny of the media. And while Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton attempt to censure conservative talkshow hosts, the liberal print and television media has gone mostly unmentioned.
News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch has drawn much attention recently. He finalized purchase of the Dow Jones company, including a much debated takeover of the Wall Street Journal. While DJI owners the Bancroft family fought off the Murdoch empire for several months, after much negotiation and haggling over editorial protections. the Wall Street Journal is now apart of the Murdoch machine.
Many journalists have decried the Murdoch takeover. Hopefully, he will provide one avenue in print media where conservatives can get a fair hearing. But that is exactly what liberals don't want - a fair hearing.
What, you say? Liberals want to censure conservatives? Absolutely.
Robert Licter, director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs said, "Murdoch brings together two things that many journalists think ruins their profession: money and conservatism."
Money ruining journalism, perhaps. But conservatism?
There you have it. From the horse's, or more appropriately, the donkey's mouth. The Fairness Doctrine has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with suppressing conservative freedom of speech.
News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch has drawn much attention recently. He finalized purchase of the Dow Jones company, including a much debated takeover of the Wall Street Journal. While DJI owners the Bancroft family fought off the Murdoch empire for several months, after much negotiation and haggling over editorial protections. the Wall Street Journal is now apart of the Murdoch machine.
Many journalists have decried the Murdoch takeover. Hopefully, he will provide one avenue in print media where conservatives can get a fair hearing. But that is exactly what liberals don't want - a fair hearing.
What, you say? Liberals want to censure conservatives? Absolutely.
Robert Licter, director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs said, "Murdoch brings together two things that many journalists think ruins their profession: money and conservatism."
Money ruining journalism, perhaps. But conservatism?
There you have it. From the horse's, or more appropriately, the donkey's mouth. The Fairness Doctrine has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with suppressing conservative freedom of speech.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Featured on WND.com
On Saturday, July 28, 2007, Worldnetdaily.com published my article "Our cotton-candy-fluffy-bunny news." Disgusted with the recent coverage of celebrity lawbreakers, I decided to write an article decrying the low standards of journalism, especially in television coverage.
"This was a full week for the world media: President Bush explained that insurgents in Iraq are tied to al-Qaida, Attorney General Gonzalez sparred with U.S senators, and the Dow lost 226 points. Yet, as I watched the headlines blur across my TV screen, it was clear the media had "Hilton syndrome." Lindsay Lohan's arrest dominated headlines and was the lead story on almost every news program. A nauseating reminder of the Hilton media frenzy, America confirmed its infatuation with the cult of the celebrity.
"A month ago, when socialite Paris Hilton managed to get herself a jail sentence, the media pushed aside world affairs for the opportunity to catch a glimpse of the blond heiress. Enamored with her looks, and nothing else, the media reached rock bottom in standards of coverage.
"To confirm the permanence of our society's deterioration, news of Lindsay Lohan, as well as the meltdown of Britney Spears, spread across TV screens Thursday and Friday like a bad virus on your computer. Yet these are these stories Americans want. We clamor for news about our favorite celebrities. Does she trim her nails herself? Did he have a weekend fling on the beach? Will they get married, or just continue living together for the next 12 years?
Why are we so shallow?"
"This was a full week for the world media: President Bush explained that insurgents in Iraq are tied to al-Qaida, Attorney General Gonzalez sparred with U.S senators, and the Dow lost 226 points. Yet, as I watched the headlines blur across my TV screen, it was clear the media had "Hilton syndrome." Lindsay Lohan's arrest dominated headlines and was the lead story on almost every news program. A nauseating reminder of the Hilton media frenzy, America confirmed its infatuation with the cult of the celebrity.
"A month ago, when socialite Paris Hilton managed to get herself a jail sentence, the media pushed aside world affairs for the opportunity to catch a glimpse of the blond heiress. Enamored with her looks, and nothing else, the media reached rock bottom in standards of coverage.
"To confirm the permanence of our society's deterioration, news of Lindsay Lohan, as well as the meltdown of Britney Spears, spread across TV screens Thursday and Friday like a bad virus on your computer. Yet these are these stories Americans want. We clamor for news about our favorite celebrities. Does she trim her nails herself? Did he have a weekend fling on the beach? Will they get married, or just continue living together for the next 12 years?
Why are we so shallow?"
Monday, July 23, 2007
Al Qaeda in Iraq
While liberals continue to tell America that Iraq is not apart of the war on terrorism, a revolutionary partnership has taken place in Iraq that confirms exactly the opposite. The Washington Times reported today that, "U.S. forces have brokered an agreement between Sunni and Shi'ite tribal leaders to join forces against al Qaeda and other extremists..."
Public Terrorist Number One is Al Qaeda, and it has terrorist cells in Iraq.
The rival tribes Suuni and Shi'ite have been warring factions for hundreds, or thousands of years. For these two groups to join forces is historic. It takes something pretty extreme to cause these rivals to halt their bloody feuding and take up arms against someone else. But Al Qaeda has enough of a presence in Iraq that it is the catalyst.
Iraqi President Talabani told President Bush earlier this year that, "We have serious problems with terrorism. The main enemy of Iraqi people is al Qaeda and terrorists cooperating with them."
So liberals, take a hint. We cannot accept anything except complete victory in Iraq.
Public Terrorist Number One is Al Qaeda, and it has terrorist cells in Iraq.
The rival tribes Suuni and Shi'ite have been warring factions for hundreds, or thousands of years. For these two groups to join forces is historic. It takes something pretty extreme to cause these rivals to halt their bloody feuding and take up arms against someone else. But Al Qaeda has enough of a presence in Iraq that it is the catalyst.
Iraqi President Talabani told President Bush earlier this year that, "We have serious problems with terrorism. The main enemy of Iraqi people is al Qaeda and terrorists cooperating with them."
So liberals, take a hint. We cannot accept anything except complete victory in Iraq.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)